Originally from the Journal of Enforcement of Arbitration Awards

Preview Page

Many parents, like me, will recall the joy of reading “Babar” stories to their offspring. Babar, the protagonist in the books written by French authors Jean and Laurent de Brunhoff, is not just a likeable elephant in a green coat—he is King Babar, the ruler of a fictitious African kingdom. Indeed, as the stories multiply, one encounters Babar tackling some of the more challenging aspects of kingship: losing his crown, getting lost in his palace, or worrying about ghosts in the basement. Standard stuff for a pachyderm potentate.

But the more time I spent with the annals of Babar, the more I worried about his regime. Babar seemed to be ruling a one-party state—certainly the de Brunhoffs give no hint that Babar’s family tolerated any opposition. His position on the issues of the day is never explored:  while Babar is presumably opposed to the ivory trade, the books never indicate how he would approach human rights, much less the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, tax avoidance schemes or similar modern policy hazards.  Above all, what was the source of Babar’s enormous fortune?  Perhaps some of it came from inherited wealth, but one could never avoid the impression he might be raiding the treasury in order to subsidize his mammoth spending. His frequent family excursions to Paris, in particular, seems to raise a red flag.

Such are the flights of imagination of a simple disputes lawyer.  Yet they do have a real-life connection. The issue of “klepto” rulers and their wealth is a far from academic topic in international disputes.